At least 23 dead apparently:
https://www.timesofisrael.com/israe...id-to-kill-at-least-23-18-of-them-foreigners/
https://www.timesofisrael.com/israe...id-to-kill-at-least-23-18-of-them-foreigners/
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Shells are currently being fired both ways across the Syrian border
- Thread starter Geoff
- Start date
"Decided to hold on to"
This is hysterical, the likelyhood of Israel giving back that stolen land is about the same as the U.S. giving California back to Native Americans.
Oh fucking please.
Syria started a fucking war with Israel and tried to invade them. Israel held onto the Golan Heights in return and won't return it until Syria promises a full on peace negotiation and demilitarization of the border along with ceasing support of Hezbollah.
If you think that's fucking ridiculous then I hope you NEVER have a voice in politics.
User banned (2 days): personal attacks, accumulated infractions
This is rich coming from John Bolton's resetera account. Nice mustache my dude.
Yeah, you know, except the wars in '67 and '73 when Israel already had nuclear weapons (plus the smaller lebanon conflict).
Yeah, it was linked on CNN in the updated article, but i guess i didnt check the date when i clicked it.
Wanting something done to help the Syrian people doesn't mean a war to overthrow Assad is the way to go. Going by our track record, we are poorly equiped to leave the Syrian people better off. We're great at destroying and killing, but not good at the rest of what's needed. Just going "hey, that guy's evil! Lets get him!" Doesn't work. War is ugly, complicated, and leads to other consequences down the road.
Sure - decided to hold on to. It's not like there have been a credible alternative from an Israeli POV? The alternative would be to simply give Golan back to Syria without a deal keeping Syria from the on again off again series of shelling and incursions in to northern Israel - nobody on the Israeli side would be able to sell that idea.
"Deciding to hold on to" is like not giving a tool back to your neighbor because he still owes you $50.
This was land taken during a war, there was no scenario Israel was EVER going to give it back no matter what Syria did. To act otherwise is at best horribly naive.
the reporting that iran was directly involved without any apparent evidence or confirmation from the iranian government is more proof that the media can just make shit up as long as it's regarding one of the official enemies of the US state
you're being disingenuous, there's no giving it back. it's a part of israel according to them, and they have israeli people living there. no matter what syria does, it's now a stolen land they've incorporated into their state to make it bigger and they would never let go of it.
yep. i live in iran, if they actually attacked israel they would have screamed it from the hilltops this morning and considered it a victory and exaggerated the results to make it seem way bigger than it was. it wasn't iran, it was just a great opportunity for israel to do some fear mongering and make their people actually believe iran is attacking them. it always helps to create an imaginary enemy, keep people in fear, and distract them from other stuff. it's easier to rule them that way.
Ummm.... the Six Day War was started with an airstrike on Egyptian targets by Israel.
Are we liberally changing facts and history to make excuses for Israel now?
Golan Heights is most definitely an illegally occupied territory.
In what Tom clancy fiction did Israel have nuclear weapons in 67????
When did Lebanon invade Israel in the 80s????
LMAO
"Oh yeah we intend to invad you and we have armies amassed on all of your borders, oh and we aren't known to openly declare war before invading BUT you should have waited."
Again, it was a necessary preemptive strike after two neighbouring countries declared that they will destroy Israel and mobilised their troops.
Can you talk like s human being or is responding in a comprehensive way out of your grasp?
Learn how to respond without resorting to logical fallacies.
It's believed that Israel acquired its first operational nuclear weapon in December 1966.
I'll repeat myself, the Six Day War was started by Israeli strikes on Egyptian targets
Are you guys trying to contest history?
are you surprised by israel-apologists trying to rewrite history? that's like one of their most important tools.
you can't make this stuff up
The only official confirmation came from the ptime minister in the 70s.
And the US will poor plenty of money in for support of Israel as well. This seems way too convenient a time for Trump to pull out of the Iran deal. Israel can bomb till their hearts content and use the excuse of Iran's pursuit of Nuclear weapons as a reason to attack them
And it was JUSTIFIED by aggressive actions and threats to invade from an enemy that doesn't declare war.
Lol at anyone thinking otherwise.
if war is justified because of aggressive posturing outside of one's borders then iran, north korea, and russia (among others) should be allowed to attack the US right now
Ok so, ignoring the other bullshit surrounding the circumstances, you accept that Israel started the Six Day War?
Because if we start changing known and accepted history for the sake of our arguments, this will be a pointless and fruitless discussion.
I'm not, but it's important to know that the attack was provoked because Egypt and Syria we're planning an invasion.
but that's the US. [for some reason] the rules are different when it comes to the US and israel.
For what it's worth, Iranian-backed Syrian fighters have been shelling Israel, and vice versa, for several months now. Iranian-backed Syrian fighters have "inadvertently" killed about 3,000 Palestinians in the last 4 years of the Syrian Civil War.
Wait, you mean the Russia that shoots down civilian planes and annexes regions of neighbouring countries?
Dude wtf are you talking. The Arab Nations were openly planning an attack. Egpyt took over UNEF positions and closed the straits to specifically isolate Israel knowing full well that it would be considered an act of war.
Stop acting as if the Arab forces were just midning their business and weren't prepping for an invasion
do what, argue that the US is an aggressive imperial state that commits war crimes all the time? yes, and i don't see what the soviets have to do with that
the US has been prepped to invade iran since the revolution. we've had military ships and planes just outside (and occasionally inside) their territory constantly for decades. the current administration is as of this week taking concrete steps to provoke iran and isolate them even further economically for no reason other than pure hawkish ideology.
do you think iran is justified if they attack the US?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Syrian_Civil_War#Foreign_civilians_killed
3000 is an estimate. A Palestinian rights group out of London claims roughly 4,000 deaths, others claim around 3,000. The numbers have been widely reported but I don't know the political motivations of these NGOs, whether they're Anti-Assad/Anti-Iran, Pro-Syrian Rebels, Pro-Palestinian home rule, etc.
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20171126-3613-palestinians-killed-in-syria-since-2011-ngo/
https://www.albawaba.com/news/least-4000-palestinians-killed-syrias-7-year-bloody-conflict-1110088
There's also about ~100,000 Palestinians unaccounted for after the seige of the Yarmouk refugee camp in Syria, as it's numbers went from about 120,000 mostly Palestinian refugees down to about 8,000 or 9,000 today... WIth a large number being killed by shelling, starvation, disease, and in military skirmishes between the Pro-Syrian forces and Syrian rebels (generally backed by Palestinian fighters). But there are so many factions, divisions, and motivations, and without any UN monitoring it's difficult to get an accurate count or assess what's happened to those ~100,000 people.
Last edited:
Just admit that the Russian Federation and it's predecessor states are/were equaly imperialistic and prone to commiting war crimes.
ok? my point is just that if israel was justified in starting a war because people were being scary at their borders then that opens a door to a very bad place unless you're just a hypocrite and think that one country can do whatever they want militarily while everyone else should just shut up and take it
User Banned (2 Weeks): Continued hostility towards others, history of similar behavior.
Oh I didn't realize the US closed the only lifeline to the outside world, amazed over 100,000 soldiers on the borders, openly kicked out UN forces from positions meant to act as a mediating force, openly talked about the annihilation of the Iranian people, and committed an action that was universally agreed to be the cassus belli for war.
Please proceed.
i meant source that somehow iran is responsible for the death of those people.
The two comparisons are not similar enough to support this argument. The US may have military positions outside of Russia via NATO countries, but they are not being openly hostile or making any actual militarily aggressive moves, a stark contrast to Egypt and Syria immediately prior to the war. While Israel's pre-emptive strike is not absolutely justified, it is understandable given prior historical conflicts and the evidence at the time.
This is why "whataboutism" is lazy, you should do better.
If the US would pose an immediate threat to Iran (having a sizeable invasion force ready) I would say that an Iranian preemptive strike is justified.
In the context of "Israel wasn't responsible for the 6 day war, therefore aggressor countries have less of a claim to territory they lost during it", the technicality that they didn't wait for multiple armies to invade doesn't have any bearing on the discussion.
It's a staggering ignorance of history to think Egypt, Syria, and Jordan were just minding their own business when out of nowhere Israel lashed out, regardless of what you think of their occupation of Golan.
Except for, you know, the scenario where it actually happened. Israel gave back the Sinai in exchange for a peace treaty and recognition.
I'd love to hear what some folks here have to say about the Yom Kippur War.
Oh... I said "Iranian backed Syrian fighters." Assad's army is supported with weapons, training, financing, and fighters from Iran... as well as just simply Iranian military guard fighting in Syria. It's estimated that Iran has ~70,000 troops fighting in Syria on behalf of the Syrian regime.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_involvement_in_the_Syrian_Civil_War
I didn't think this was a controversial or contested idea. Is there something you... disagree with?
no, but "4000 palestinians have died in the civil war" isn't the same thing as "iranian backed fighters have killed 4000 palestinians"
This is hilarious. The hypocrisy of Israel literally knows no bounds
Iran, DPRK, and Russia (among others) are allowed to attack the United States at any time.
States can do what they want militarily. States are not free from the attendant consequences of their military actions, thus why states rarely ever act with the sort of reckless abandon in your first post trying to highlight a hypocrisy of some kind.